If you bought Manhattan RE in 1998, you would be a gazillionaire right now!

:) bought my commercial investments in mid 90's... and not gazzs$... but I'm full up on commodes :)

See alpine292... i do agree with you.... but I'm the rare bird that paid off my mortgage ASAP and did not HELOC myself into the abyss.... for everyone else... (shrimpie)... good luck if you bought in 2000 to Feb 3, 2009... and anyone else who's been supplementing their $100K/yr salary with add'l debt on their primary/secondary homes.... see u on the south side of $500psf :)

this is idiotic. I bought in 1998 -- but sold at the end of 2007. I made money in real estate -- but to be own now is senseless. Be nimble, be quick -- or get your ass burned...

alpine292: Check out the amazing charts on urban digs. INSANE APPRECIATION! Anyone who rented over the past 10 years is definitely kicking themsleves in the butt!

Yes, this explains all the bitterness from the renters. A tiny drop and they get all excited.

drip...drip....drip....drip....drip.....drip....drip.....oh my the buckets getting full of your equity happyowner...

Anyone who didn't sell last year is definitely kicking themselves in the butt.

Noah always has something interesting to say.

Although the thrust of this particular posting is correct, I note that the arithmetic is not - which is unusual.

Take Harlem.

Starting value: $70,001
Ending value: $455,034
Period: 9 years "not" 10 years.

Compound annualized return: 23.1% "not" 55%.

Simply dividing total return by number of years is not real relevant as the compounding effect is critical.

Most investors do, indeed, tend to drive using the rearview mirror. The 10-year compound annualized return for the S&P 500 for the period ending 12/31/99 was 18.21%. What did that tell you about subsequent returns from the S&P 500? Not a whole lot. If it did say anything, it was caveat emptor!

My sister bought a one bedroom in '99 for $210 and sold in '08 for $720 before agent's fee, etc. Good profit, but not insane.

It was one hell of a ride. When I purchased in 1996, I couldn't find much anyone to support the buying decision. I sure didn't think that the investment would explode in value in 8 years. The next property I owned for a tad over 2 years (sold 2006) had absurd appreciation during that time and the sheep were lining up to pay whatever.

One has to know when to hold them and when to fold them. Also, the largest tax advantage of RE ownership is to sell and reap the profits (up to $500K for couples) with little to zero Fed taxes.

Topper, I totally agree. Let's see, the Dow Jones crossed 10K for the first time during 1998 and today, Kudlow is wetting his pants because it's back over 8K. The NASDQ had a massive run from 1990 - 2000 where it topped at 4800 and "market experts" at the time were calling for a doubling from there. Today, it's a tad over 1200. Ditto for Tokyo that exploded to 38,000 in 1988 and 2 decades later sits at 8K. Who would have thought but they were all great rides for some investors as well but not so for others.

It's so sad to see Kudlow wetting his pants. He really needs a new gig.

Today reminds me a bit of late 2000. Remember, "buy the dip" on the stock market?

As Serge07 says, the big buying opportunities come when you break with the conventional wisdom.

it seems that you guys believe that prices are not going to go back to 1998. i think it's gonna happen though.

Topper, I'm not sure what today reminds me of. I can usually make sense of a larger fundamental picture where one can make macro based decisions which for the most part have turned out well. In the current environment, the cross currents, scale of government intervention and issues facing the global financial industry are on a scale that I can't find anyone to get a grip on. For example, I've been reading the corporate earnings releases from the large Japanese industrial blue chips over the past couple of weeks and they are a nightmare as are the outlooks.

and Kudlow does need t find a different gig. Te mustard seed thing is getting real old. :)

alpine's the guy who jumps off the top of a skyscraper and, as he's passing the 30th floor, flashes a thumbs up and says "so far so good!!"

LMMFAO, putz.

huh. in 1998 i was 18 and in college outside boston, so not really an option. i did buy at the first opportunity, which was 2002. i sold in 2007.

yeah, i really feel bitter.

> Check out the amazing charts on urban digs. INSANE APPRECIATION!

Yes, because you timed it perfectly. You bought at the bottom and you sold at the top.

Oh, wait... whoops, you haven't sold yet.

Alpine hasn't noticed the hole in his pot of gold...

> Today reminds me a bit of late 2000. Remember, "buy the dip" on the stock market?

Yes, and if you bought dot com stocks in the dip in 200, you are broke now.

> As Serge07 says, the big buying opportunities come when you break with the conventional wisdom.

Yes, breaking with conventional wisdom can make you TONS. Or have you lose your shirt (sometimes common wisdom is correct).

More importantly, assuming its "common wisdom" that Manhattan RE is going down is simply wrong. Much of this city is still in denial. Hell, apline himself denied the decline just last week.

So, yes, moving against crowds can make you money. But buying 25% of the way into a crash is generally a money loser.

sorry, obviously that was..

"Yes, and if you bought dot com stocks in the dip in 2000, you are broke now."